The Sun. — London, England, 1864-12-10 00:00:00

rHE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 10, 1864. Reform. Movement in the West Riding, On Thursday evening a demonstration took place in St. George's-hall, Bradford, in favour of Parlia- mentary Reform. Five members of Parliament, all connected with the Wcst Riding of Yorkshire, were announced to take part in the proceedings — and out of the number, Mr W. E. Forster, Sir F. Crossley, Mr Stansfield, and Mr Baines put in an appearance. Mr E. A. Leatham was absent on ac count of a family bereavement. The body of the hall and gallery were crowded—and in the stalls, for admission to which a small charge was made, there was also a good attendance. There were com puted to be about 3,000 persons present. The chair was taken by Mr. W. E. Forster, M.P. ; and there were also present in addition to the members of Parliament already named, Aldermen Mitchell and Law ; Messrs. S. C. Kell, A. Illingworth,W.Byles, Whitehead, and other gentlemen of the neighbour hood. _ _ _ Mr FORSTER said—Before I make the few re marks with which I must open the business of the meeting, I feel it due to you and myself, consider ing the other gentlemen present upon the platform, to state why lam in the chair. We have present this evening members of Parliament much better fitted, from their standing in the House, and also from the part they have taken in this great cines. tion, to occupy the chair, especially my friend Mr. Baines, who for two or three Sessions has with such energy, with such ability (cheers), and such con. -- - - rage, held up the standard of reform, and therefore I wish it clearly understood that the sole reason why I am in thishonourable position is because this meeting happens to be held in Bradford, and it was thought that the member for Bradford, of all others, should preside. (Cheers) This is a Bradford meeting, and yet in some respects it may be called a West Riding meeting. It is a meeting of the people of Bradford, but it is such a meeting as might have been held in any of the towns of the West Riding, considering what the feeling upon this question now is. (Hear, hear.) I have no doubt, if it had been determined that the first meeting upon this question should be held either in Leeds, Huddersfield, or Halifax, you would have had a similar meeting, and I suppose it is to the feeling that this meeting is one representing the 'West Riding that we have so large a number of the representatives of the West Riding constituencies present tonight. (Hear, hear.) Why do we Reformers hold this meeting, to be followed up by other meetings elsewhere ? We have had Reform meetings over and over again in this hall, until we are nearly tired, without do• ing any good. Why, then, have we this meeting ? Because the promoters of the meeting, being active reformers at Manchester and elsewhere, have come to the conclusion that now especially it is desirable that the reformers in our large towns, and in large districts such as the West Riding, which has al- ways held a strong interest on Reform, should meet together in large numbers, and should call to their counsel their representatives to consider the present position of the Reform question, and that especially at this time should they do so, chiefly for this rea son—that this Parliament, which waa originally a Reform Parliament, which was called together as a Reform Parliament, which has long ceased to be a Reform Parliament—(hear, hear)—is now app. proaching to its close. I don't say we are to have a dissolution next session. We are very loth to die— (laughter)—but we cannot live beyond next year, and I suspect, even if wo don't resolve upon dying next year, that during the next session we shall be only dead-alive—(laughter)—and that the approach of our deuth will weigh upon ns as a l'eavy cloud. (Hear, hear.) I fancy we shall be thinking of our dissolution, and therefore it is well that our consti tuents, and the country also, should be thinking of the subj,2ct, and considering what, when Par• liament is dissolved, shall bo done with the Reform question. (Hear, hear.) It may be said, " Must we wait until then ?'' I fear we must. I only wish there was a chance to the contrary ; that at the last moment Ministers should recollect upon what conditions this Parliament was chosen, to what extent it was pledged to Reform, and that even at tha last moment Ministers would do their duty and fulfil their pledges, staking their exis tence upon it, and calling upon Parliament to fulfil its pledges, or stAing the existence of Parliament upon it. I only wish that was probable, but I fear we must consider that it is almost without the range of probability. I think that at Reformers the practical question we row have to consider is what line eve shall take and in what position we shall place this reform qu?stion after the next dis solution of Parliament. (Applause.) Just for a moment let us consider that question. Is there any reason why, although five or six years ego we mlde the Reform question a paramount question on the hustings, we should not do so at the next dissolution ? (Hear, hear.) Are the circumstances now different to what they then were ? Is the need for Reform less ? Is there any more truth, any less falsehood, in the alleged dangers of Re. form now than there was then P (Cheers.) First, as to the need. I think that in two or three sen tences I may pass over that. We all feel that the need is as strong as it was before. Take our own constituencies. We have upon this platform four members of Parliament representing four consti tuencies. What are those constituencies ? Those constituencies represent one million and a quarter of people ; they comprise one-twentieth of the population of Great Britain and Ireland. (Ap. plause.) What is the share of the representa tion that these constituencies have ? We four who aro hero, and our four colleagues who aro not here, with one-twentieth of the population, have one.eightieth of the representation of the kingdom. Again, take the three towns that are represented here—Leeds, Bradford, and Halifax. These three towns have a population of 320,000, I mfght give more striking cases, more striking illustrations, but I will take three towns in our own immediate neigh. bourhood—Pontefract, Knaresborough, and Ripon. What is the population of these three towns ? 23,000. Each man who lives at Ripon, Pontefract, or Knaresborough has 15 times as much voting Power as the man who lives at Leeds, Bradford, or Halifax. And what is the especial virtue that be.' longs to the Pontefract, or Knaresborough, or Ripon man that gives him 15 times as much voting power as belongs to you here, or to the men of Leeds? (" Hear, hear," and applause.) This is the inconsistent, anomalous mode in which the re presentation is apportioned. But then going from that, and coming to those who have votes, even where there is representation, what are the voters in these three constituencies of the West Riding— Leeds, Bradford, and Halifax? They form less than 1-25th of those free constituencies, while the adult tax-paying men form considerably more than one-fifth. Therefore the result is that only one man out of five adult taxpayers has any share in self. government—has any vote. (Hear, hear.) Weil, then, who are those four-fifths that are excluded ? What class do they form ? They are almost all of one class—labourers, artisans, working men. I have had some practical experience of that. When I was contesting Leeds with my friend Mr Baines, I could have counted the working men who were able to vote for Mr Baines or myself upon my fingers, and I could almost do the same in my pre- sent constituency. Yet, as I ventured to 'say in the House of Commons, if we go through these towns, and if we look at what has been done, and at what is doing, to what class have we to look for the success of those towns more than to the hard working artisans and labourers who are thus excluded from all share in the representation? (Applause.) Now, I will not dwell any longer upon the need. We feel it to be as strong as ever it Was; we feel it is an i nsu lt an d a disgrace. (Applause.) W e now come to the dan gers, Are there any dangers in this Reform, in this act of justice, g reater than the y were before ? I hear men constantly talking as 0101101 they feared Reform much mr;re Oftu they used to do, hut I a t, ways doubt whether Eliey fe . s.r 1 1t form E':0141 th an they did; they think there in less danger now in F ";iiieFraing that fear or the appearan ce of it. Rut w hy should they ? I won't anticipate my friend Mr Bibles, who, if he says one.fourth or one-tenth part of what ha has said in the House of Commons would prove to demonstration to any opponent or objector that if there was any danger—and I don't bsjave there was-5 or 10 years ago, there must be less danger now, such has been the progress to in. dustry, morals, and prosperity of the working men themselves. But fresh grounds of danger are es- pressed. I hear men talking in an ominous way about strikes for wages, and that, VI( refore, the working men must not have the franetie. I am not going into the question of strikes. We all lament these differences between labour and capital, but they are no argument against the extension of the franchise. Strikes, however deplorable, are not so common and destructive as they were in former times,and when they do occur are accompanied with far less violence and outrage than used to be the case. I begin to hope that we now see symptoms of a greater agreement between labour and capital than we ever saw before. (Hear.) I believe cooperation is going to strike out strikes from existence. Whether that will be the case or not, I say, as an employer of iabour, that anything more fatal to our class interests—if you choose to divide us into classes —than this argument of the wages question against an extension of the franchise I cannot conceive. Then we come to what is said by those who are cone stantly looking at the civil war in America. " America is a democracy—America is a self governing republic, and there yon have a civil war, and will you venture to insist on Reform when you see what has occurred on the other side of the At. lantic ?" What does this mean but that we are to cling to our aristocratic Government, that we are to fence it round and preserve it from the breath of Reform ? Why ? Because the democracy of America are engaged in a life and death struggle to free their country from the grasp of a slave holding oligarchy. Let us suppose for a moment that they had done in America just what they have not done. Let us suppose that the Republicans of America, of the North, had continued to allow themselves to be governed by the man.owners of the South. What should we have said of them ? What did we say of them? That they were so engaged in mammon hunting that they forgot principle, that they were careless of their own liberty, that they were glad to connive at the tyranny of the South over the negro ? (A Voice—" That is not a slave question.") I beg your pardon ; it is a question with which we are constantly taunted. (Loud cheers, and another Voice—" That is not the ques• tion.") I will bring you to the question very soon. (Laughter and cheers.) Because they declared they would no longer submit to be thns ruled, they at the same time said they would not submit to have their country broken up. If they had done the contrary, what should we have said of them? We should have said that they were cowardly—(loud applause)—that those working men of America had no patriotism ; that they preferred money and an easy life to principle and to their country. (Hear, hear, and applause.) And we should have said to them, " Take care how y on let the aristocracy of England lose its power and be replaced by a democracy, which will thus allow itself to be subservient to special interest.' (Applause.) Because they have not done so, because the working men, the artisans and yeomen of America have poured out their lives for the last two or three years on behalf of their country ; because at this last mo ment they have shown by their conduct at the late vote that they even hated slavery more than they loved union. (A Voice—That is not the question.) I will come to the question. (Cheers and laughter.) Because these working men on the other side of the Channel have shown that they hated slavery, and loved their country, therefore we are constantly told, and I suppose my friend there would join in so tell. ing us, the working men, the artisans and labourers of England, are to be excluded from their share in Government, and to be pariahs in their constitution. (Loud applause.) Weil, but I think the opponents of Reform ought to be ashamed of mentioning Ame rica, and for this reason. Who is it that has pre served this country from intermeddling in American affairs ? Whether it was right or wrong, it would have been considered by the Americans, as it would have been considered by us, such an intermeddling as might possibly, might probably have led us to war with our kinsman cn behalf of slavery. I say who has prevented this being done ? Not the aristocracy of England ; not even the middle classes of England, but the working men of England. (Applause.) I am not complimenting you. I believe you would have done it if you had been tried ; you were not tried. But there were working men who were tried — the working men of Lancashire, who were tried in every way—(loud cheers)—who under the strongest possible inducement, that of deep and unmerited poverty, refused to palter with principle. They were wrong, perhsps, my friend there would say ; but he will not deny this, that whether wrong or right, they have shown that the working men of that great district—and I do not compliment them so far as to suppose that they did what other working men would not have done—fulfilled what is the greatest and most necessary condition of granting power to any order of men whatever. (Cheers.) That is, they have preferred principle to interest, they have preferred the good of their country and the principles which they professed to a mere pecuniary advantage. (Cheers.) I dare say a great many of you, of the working men present, have read Mr. Mill's book upon representative go vernment. Yon will have seen that he, although a friend of the people,• and -a strong friend of Reform, looks with some fear upon a great eaten. sion of the franchise, because, he says, it would throw a great deal of power into the hands of the working classes, and that they might use that power to the disadvantage of their country, and might prefer their apparent interest, the in- , terest of the moment, to the interest of the country. I feel that this fear of his must have been removed by what has taken place lately, by the test which has been applied to them within the last five years, and which they have most suc cessfully stood. I think I have shown the need is as great as it was, and that tho dangers are even less than they were. Then, are we or are we not to have the reform question a pre-eminent one at the next dissolution? Here I am met with another objection. I are told perhaps that "There is no new fact. no new circumstance. We do not imagine that the theoretical arguments on behalf of Reform are less strong than they were. Wo do not suppose there is much in this change. But we have discovered there was a hollowness in what you thought to be a fact before. We have discovered that all this talk about Reform was hollow and insincere. We find out now by the apathy with which the Reform question is viewed, and by the manner in which those who professed Reform views at one time do not profess them now—we gather from all that, that those working men whom you talk so much about do not care to have votes, I then surely we may leave them alone, and not give them that which they do not care for." After all that is the strongest argument we have to meet—the alleged apathy of the people, and especially the alleged apathy of that class in favour of whom the extension of the franchise is to be made. Upon that point I might say this meeting alone is a clear proof of apathy; but I will not be contented with that, I will go into the question, if you will allow me, a minute or two longer. (Cheers.) I don't mean to say there is so great 1 a call or so much need for Reform now as there was when the great Reform Bill was passed ; I don't pretend to say that there aro the agitation and feeling in the country there were then. There is not even the same feeling among work ing men as at the time of the Chartist agitation, and why ? not because they are not convinced, as they were then, that they ought to have a share in the Government, but because they found out that they then exaggerated the material advantage they suppsed would be obtained by any change of Government. (Hear, hear.) But this much I will say, there is so much feeling about Reform among the prominent and leading men of the Liberal party throughout all our boroughs, and even in our counties, that I will venture upon a prophecy, and it is this, that when the dissolution comes we shall find that the Liberal members will be just as much pledged to Reform as they were at the last dissolution. (Hear, hear.) The question therefore changes itself into this—are these pledges to be taken seri ously? Are they expected to be falsified or aro they not? That is the question which we have to consider, and not merely we ourselves. I want our opponents and lukewarm friends throughout the country just to answer this question in their own minds. Is it desirable—is it not dangerous-- that at the next dissolution members should be pledged to Reform as they were before, and that those pledges should be trifled with by the :lest Parliament as they have been by this? (Hear, hear.) If that be the case, there will be far more danger itv.,nlved in the breaking of these pledges than in all that is imagined by the opponents of Reterm, ([Lear, hear.) It will he destructive o all political morality, it will be fraught with danger to the Parliament itself, and what is by far the least of the evils, it will be utterly destructive, and that for many years to come, of the Liberal party. (Hear, hear.) I believe (ha question will present itself in that active way to the Liberal party throughout the country —will atean present etb pre present affirmativet e s n e t lf mo n wi m t h e su t e h force that they will be obliged to fi t giv answer; l evb a u n li dl e ittle as we may think o that the force with which that q uest i on w i ll present itself to their minds will be . so great—howev er much th ey may disl i ke enter taw ng it—that it w ill b e carried to some aga in eeettiement. (Cheers.) I have great hope in the present position of the leaders of our party. Don't suppose lam so sanguine as to think our present Premier is likely to be very active in ob taining a Reform Bill. (Hear, hear, and a laugh.) We all know that Lord Palmerston has a wonderful past to look back upon—a past in some respects a glorious one and greater than that of any other man now living ; but Lord Palmerston is of that age, he has come to that time of life when even he cannot look forward to a future. We have other men in the Government who do look forward to a future. You saw how Mr Gladstone—(loud cheers)—last session looked forward to a future. Mr Gladstone knows he has responsibilities and hopes in the future before him. (Cheers.) But he cannot do all. Reformers throughout the country, do your duty, and you shall not be forsaken by Mr Gladstone. (Loud cheers.) I will only detain you a few minutes longer by two or three remarks on another branch of the subject, (Cheers.) I believe that we shall have a Reform Bill ; and I agree with Mr Leatham that the danger is not so much that we shall have no bill, as that we may have a bad bill, (Hear, hear.) We must keep our eyes open and our hands ready to prevent what he calls a pernicious compromise. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) I urged on working men to direct their attention to all discussions upon Reform that are taking place, You must not suppose that because certain suggestions appear to be a mere specu lation that they will not be listened to. Those who have the power in their hands are very prone to try experiments, and they will be only prevented trying them by finding rom the earnestness of those concerned that they will not be experimented upon. When we had the debate last ses sion, so excellently introduced by Mr Baines, I ventured to say, in reply to an hon. gentleman who said that working men wore hardly fit to discuss political subjects, that I should like to bring him to my borough and introduce him to working men who would discuss political questions with him. (Laughter.) It might have improved him, and might have improved you also. I know you discuss several of those ideas that are started in regard to reform, and I want you to read a book on the subject written by Earl Gray, son of the Earl Grey who introduced the great Reform Bill. One of his propositions is that the House of Commons should in a measure elect itself, should cease to be a representative body, and should become self chosen. I don't suppose for a moment that such a proposition would gain much attention (Hear, and applause.) Another proposition of his, and one which I conceive to be the most injurious that could be brought forward, is that though working men should have a share in the representation, they should have it as a class, I hope that when the working men do obtain a vote they will vote as Englishmen, and not as a class divided from their fellow countrymen. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) There is an other proposition of Earl Grey's which does deserve some consideration. It is what he calls the representation of mi norities. I wish working men would direct their attention to this subject, and make their opinion regarding it known to the country, and especially to the House of Commons, where it is certain before long to be discussed. Do not sup pose I commit myself to this plan. I see in it many dangers It may make a minority in some cases a majority; it may give men with special objects, such as the Mains Law advo cates, more than their due influence; might make elec. tioneering as complicated and difficult as bookmaking at a race ; but it is worth patient consideration by Reformers, and especially by working men, because it is an honest attempt to meet a danger honestly feared, and because, at any rate, it is not unfair in principle. There is another plan which is proposed, which is a most unfair one. It is called a plurality of voting —giving one man more votes than another because he has more money—just putting five or six poor men together and saying they are only as good as one rich man. I have cor fidence in the people of Eng. land that they will never adopt such a proposition. (aear, and cheers.) I have only to say, in conclusion, that I hope the effect of this meeting will not end to-night, but that it will lead to an active and efficient org4nisation on the ques tion of Reform. (Lend cheers.) Sir F. CROSSLEY said that Mr Forster had dwelt a good deal upon the want of good faith on the part of members of the House of Commons. Ihe same thing had been touched upon by other speakers and writers on Reform, but in Eng land they did not adopt the Eastern mode—as Herod did, for example, when he ordered all children under two years of age to bo destroyed, not only in Bethlehem, but all the coasts thereof, in order to make sure of putting down the Governor who was to be the ruler of the people of Israel. They found a railway traveller who, in order secretly to rob his fellow passenger, murdered him and threw him out of the window. They did not seize every traveller in order to make sure of the murderer. They tracked him, if neces sary, across the ocean. They gave him a fair trial—if guilty, ht; had to suffer for what ho had done. The day of judgment for the House of Commons was at hand. (Laugh ter.) The constituencies would soon have the whole matter in their own hands, and it would be for them to look to the pledges given in 1859, and to see how they had been carried out. He could only answer 1 .1 . himself. He should be very sorry to have to answer for the Liberal side of the House of Commons—(laughter)---but for himself he could answer that not only since the general election of 1859, but since that of 1852, to the best of his recollection, he had been pre sent in every division on the Reform question, and also on the ballot. (Cheers.) Ho had voted in every case in favour of the measures which had been proposed, with ono excep tion, and that was Lord Derby's so-called Reform Bill of 1859. He went purposely from Yorkshire to hear Mr Dis• raeli introduce that measure, and he stood up in his place in the house, and told the right hon. gentleman that in Yorkshire they would call it a great deal of cloth and very little dinner. (Laughter.) It extended the franchise to the classes that now possessed it, and left the working classes just where it found them. But as they were without reform, it was far better than having a bill palmed off upon them to settle a question which it never could settle, (Ap plause.) It might seem an easy thing to be a member of the House of Commons for 18 years, and to be in every division on the Reform question and the Ballot, and so it would if they divided first and discussed afterwards. (Laughter.) But they had to hear the late arguments and to wait till the small hours of the morning, and to find de bates continually adjourned. He had a very strong con viction in favour of Reform when ho entered the House of Commons in 1862, and since that time that conviction had been strengthened. Since then he had seen the working classes in prosperity, and they used that prosperity by or• ganising industrial associations, establishing savings banks and building societies ; and many of them had merged into the middle classes of society. They had seen the working classes in adversity, which they bore so nobly that the stanchest Conservative might not now be afraid to ex tend the suffrage to the moat intelligent of the working classes. (Cheers.) He often thought it very singular that men situated as he and the chairman were, with their capi tal invested for the most part in mills and machinery, and employing large numbers of workpeoplo, should not be afraid to extend the suffrage, while those whose property was almost entirely in land should be their strongest oppo nents, Surely, if there was any disturbance in the coun try, their machinery and mills were of much more brittle description, and were much more likely to suffer than the land. (Cheers.) The solid acres were not likely to take t) themselves wings and fiy away. He could only ac count for it on the ground that he and his hon. friend came more in contact with the masses, and knew better their wishes and feelings. When he entered Parliament he went with a very strong feeling against the landed gentry, for he had found their opposition to Parliamentary reform so strong that he thought they wished to keep the working men down; but in conversing with many of them he was bound in all honesty to admit he was much mistaken --and here again it was because he had come in contact with them, just as he had said they wanted to do with working men, that he had got to understand them. They believed that to extend the franchise to working men would not give us as good laws as we now have, and that they were better friends to working men than he was because, the laws being bad, it was worse for the working men than for them. Nothing was gained for a cause by denying to their oppo nents all credit to the ground which they took up. Since the Refot m Bill of 1832 the advance of the country had been most marked in the intelligence of the people ; so that now those intelligent portions of working men were far better qualified to use the franchise than was the class above them at that date. But it was said, if' we were going on so weil, where was the necessity for any change ? This reminded him very much of the boy who was ridiculed by his fellows because he had grown too large for his clothes, and when he asked his father for a new suit fit for his larger size, was replied to by the parent—" Thou cub, thou, what dost thou come crying for a new suit of clothes for, when thou has thriven so well in what you have.' (Laughter);lt was safe to extend the franchise--and because it was safe, it was wise and necessary. (Cheers.) Sir Francis, after urging the necessity of including in any measure of Reform vote by ballot, concluded by proposing— " That the present state of Parliamentary representation, excluding as it does a large mojority of the people from any share in self-g ,vernment, is most unsatisfactory and unjust," Mr STANSFELD, who was received with applause, said— The resolution, to speak to which I have been invited to come here to-night, may be said to be the expression of a political truism. for it is a proposition to which sue cessive Parliaments, successive Ministries, and both of the great parties of the State have given their assent. The two last Ministers— first a Conservative, and lastly a Liberal administration—have brought forward practical measures of Reform. The Conservative Ministry came into power by what one might call an accident in political warfare. With them a measure of Reform was rather, I think, a Cabinet measure than one expressive of the wishes and the views of their supporters, Their Reform Bill was accepted by their followers as a party necessity. It was rejected by the House of Commons. On what ground was that measure rejected? It was explicitly upon the ground that the Liberal party had already pronounced a more advanced scheme, and were prepared to hying that advanced scheme forward again. Well, we know that that Reform Bill s as defeated by an adverse vote, and that the Conservative Ministry dissolved that House of Common; and appealed to the country. You had this Parliament returned, and as soon as this Parlia ment met you had a vote of want of confidence moved, and that vote of want of confidence was carried against the Con servative Administration. And thereupon the present Ministry came into power, chosen by the Parliament which had been elected upon that question of Reform. In due time they also brought forward the:r measures of nolut and I would say of it that it was at least a genuine, though it was a moderate, measure of Reform. But that measure was not suecessef ul, yet it was not defeated by any absolute vote. Passive resistance was enough to kill it. It was with drawn. It foundered like some over-laden barque heavily labouring in the trough of a leaden sea, without breeze enough to fill its sails and to carry it home to port. (Cheers.) Well, now, when that barque of Reform went down, how was the fact received and accepted by the country? We discovered that we, even the more advanced Liberals in the country at large—no doubt in this respect led astray by the bidding of rival parties upon the question of Reform—had been hugging ourselves into a false security and into a delusive hope that we had been discussing and deter mining what we would accept, or perhaps I should speak more accurately if I were to say what we would re fuse, instead of determining to put our shoulders to the wheel and to carry some satisfactory measure of reform; when all history ought to have told us that no such mea sure can be relied upon to be carried, save by the determined and persistent exertions of those who are to profit by its en actment, (Cheers.) We who have seats in the House of Commons have had to think much, and doubtfully some times, but carefully, on the great question of reform ; and I think I may say, speaking for my colleagues upon the plat. form, as well as for myself, that we feel our first duty to night to be to explain to you as we see it, with the utmost possible clearness, what I will call the situation—what is possible and what is necessary to be done. Now, we have heard that reform is in abeyance. It is in abeyance, and yet I agree with your chairman that it is a question which must come up again ere long as a leading qu es ti on f or Parliamen tary decision. I know itis said that prophets, to be safe, should above all things avoid the element of time, and I will do so, (Laughter.) But I think at least your children was not far wrong in saying that there were many reasons,which should induce ono to imagine that the reform question can hardly fail to be seriously raised at least in the Parliament which is to succeed that which now exists. I assume with him that pledges will be again invited upon the question. Now, I trust—and I conjure you as representing here a large constituency—l trust, in fairness to your representa tives, that no such pledge will be invited, and that no such pledge will be accepted, unless you are prepare] to support those from whom you invited that pledge. (Loud cheers.) And I trust, too, that warned by the past, no candidate will accept such a pledge unless he has determined, so far as in him lies, that his party shall redeem it. I think there has been a fault, to speak freely, in out-of-doors agitation upon reform which it is necessary to avoid in the future. Men have been got together intellectually interested in the question of re form. But they have dealt with it rather sentimentally, if you will allow me the expression, than in practical earnest. Their mental satisfaction appears to have consisted in discussions of programmes—whether you should start with a principle or whether you should accept a compromise, and if a com promise, what compromise— and then but too often our ex perience has shown us that the programme at length ac cepted has been, so far as all practical labour is concerned, allowed to fall to the ground. Now, in my mind, such dis cussions continued too long are worse than a waste of time. I say, let every man, and every association of men, declare with the utmost freedom the utmost extent of their wishes —but let them, at the same time that they speak openly and think freely, also show that they possess judgment and common sense. Let them recognise the fact that Reform which is not revolutionary is necessarily progressive and gradual, and that whatever their opinions may be, or my opinions may be, the result inevitably is and, must be cora promise—(applause)—a poor and worthless compromise if they refuse to assist in the work, but a substantial measure of Reform, though still a compromise, it they will put their shoulders to the wheel, I will go on to ask myself and you what is the situation, what is the position of this question, with reference to the state of mind of those classes and of those men who will practically have to decide the question in the Houses of Parliament. I find now none hardly left of that old, stern, bigoted, determined opposition to Reform, as if Reform and Revolution were identical terms, which characterised certain classes in the time of the former Re form Bill, On the contrary, I have found a general accepts anc of the notion that some extension of the franchise must sooner or later, and at no distant time, take place, and that its effect must be to admit the working classes of the country to some share, at least, of the franchise. But I think I have perceived an inclination, not unnatural, on the part of those who possess a monopoly, to put off that evil day, and I am sure that I have found in their minds a fear that they seem to have conjured up of beim:swamped—swamped under the dead level of some vast overpowering new class, which is to leave them no political existence at all. If these observations be correct, you will see that the difficulties we have to overcome are, first, a disinclination—l do not say a bigoted opposition—and second, a fear ; and what I de sire to say to this meeting is this, that I think we, who are members of the House of Commons, may be surely left to deal with the rear; but that with the disinclination it is you, you the outside public, and you alone, that can deal, and you must deal with it by the force of a persistent and overwhelming national will. (Cheers.) No man, no rea sonable man, desires a reform of such a nature that its consequence should be thie—that the whole policy, the le gislation, the administration of the country should take its tone from what may be called working-class influence alone. There is not the remotest chance of any measure being even introduced into the house, in which such a danger ...you'd lurk. I am quite sure my hon. friend the member for Leeds, who will speak after me, will have no difficulty in proving the innocence of his prorny of any such danger or design. and that one thing is your labour and your will. The hon. member concluded by seconding the resolution. Mr BAINES, in the course of his remarks, said—The re solution which has been put into my hands to move says "That further delay in remedying this injustice, after it has been repeatedly admitted in speeches from the Throne, and by the leaders of both parties, would bo derogatory to the character of Parliament and destructive to political morality." That might have been put even more strongly than it is put as to the facts which are there referred to. The Queen from the throne has five times recommended to Parliament to take this question into its consideration. Four Administrations, including every Prime Minister for the last 12 years, have also declared their adhesion to the prin ciple of Reform. Both Houses of Parliament, and both sides of those houses, have, on every occasion when the Queen addressed them, pledged themselves to take the question into their serious consideration. These are pledges given to the nation, and the nation at the list general elec tion received and confirmed those pledges. I have got hero the words used by Lord John Russell at a meeting of Lib° • ral members, held at Willis's Rooms, before the last Parlia ment actually assembled, and before the Queen's speech was delivered, at which Lord Palmerston, Lord J. Russell, and other members of the Liberal party met to determine what course they should adopt. Lord J. Russell spoke these words—" The Reform Bill ought to bo as unlike as possible to that which had been lately rejected (meaning the plan of Lord Berl)) ). It ought to enlarge the franchises of the people, and there should be no counterbalancing provisions to take away wit h one hand what was given with the other." Here the noble lord referred to the plan which ho himself had sketched, of which the two main features were an ex tension of the county franchise to the occupiers or £lO and of the borough franchise to occupiers of £6. And what did Mr Bright say in the presence of these noble lords, and of the whole Liberal party at that meeting ? "He hoped to see a measure of Parliamentary Reform brought forward not less liberal than that which they had recently seen sketched by Lord J.Russell"(£lo and £6). (Cheers.) These were the conditions upon which the present Government received the adhesion of the Liberal party, and upon which they afterwards came into office. I consider the measure sketched by Lord John Russell is a debt of honour due from the Governnient to the country. I for one have called upon them in the House of Commons—and I call upon them here, and will continue to call upon them —to redeem their pledges and prove themselves men of honour. (Hear, hear.) On this many said, " You must, at the next general election, obtain from all your members a pledge in favour of the elec tive franchise." But I am disposed to go a little faster than either. I think that the next session of Parliament, and be fore we come to the dissolution, is the time for Government to redeem their pledges, and that the Parliament and the people should insist upon that redemption. (Cheers.) In my opinion, the first session of Parliament is in every respect the worst time atwhich the question of reform can be brought forward. The last session is the best time. And not only so, but the last session is the only time in which Ministers and the existing House of Commons can redeem the pledges which they have given to the public. In the presence of these pledges, remembering what they promised and what they are again about to face, I think it would be better that you would urge them to an immediate decision of this ques. tion. Now, when the political atmosphere is celm, when every other question is swept out of the way, now is the time when this question should be urged upon the House of Commons. Nor do 1 agree with those who think there would not be a very fair prospect of success if a measure of that kind were brought forward by Government. 1 obtained for my motion last year, and I was below Mr Locke King, no less than 216 votes with 24 pairs, making 240 in favour of the measure ; but you cannot judge from the support a private member receives of the support a Government mea" sure would receive. If Lord Palmerston were to come for ward and say, "I have given my pledge, I am bound as a man of honour to redeem it," and were to say to the house moreover, "We must meet the country, whether we redeem our pledges or not; is it better to meet the country without having brought forward a measure and having exerted our utmost strength to support it and carry out our pledger, or to be subject to the reproach of having broken our pledgee?'—there is very strong reason to believe that if Government were thus to feel and thus to act they could carry the measure in the House of Commons. There is one man, if we could call him forward—the man wha has been electrifying the house and the country session after session by his magnificent speeches, and whose glorious sentiments and large heart correspond with his mighty talents in finance and with his wonderful eloquence—if we could but hear the silver trumpet voice of Gladstone—Parliament and the country I believe would respond in a manner which would secure success to a measure so brought forward. (Applause.) Lord Russell, who for many years with honour brought the question before the HOMO of Commons, having been re moved to the Upper House, is, perhaps, a little disposed to " rest and be thankful"—(laughter)—but Mr Gladstone is in the prime of his strength ; he has felt the claims of the working classes; he has acknowledged there both to theme selves and to Parliament ; he has acknowledged that Go vernment and Parliament have not done their duty towards the working classes. JSio is the man to take up this question and if you call upon him I am not sure he won't answer you. (Cheers.) Surely it would be a grand ambition for Mr. Gladstone, the man who, by the commercial treaty with France, put the top stone on the temple.of tree trade in this country, and thus loosened the last shackles from the arms and feet of industry, that ho should be the means also of leading the industrious classes within the sacred pale of the English constitution. (Cheer:.) That would be a grand ob ject of ambition—that he should be Enabled to say that ho found industry fettered and left it unfettered, that he found the people unrepresented, and that he was the means of conierring upon them the franchise. (Applause) I know some say they are indirectly represented, and that that is the same thing—that if they are well governed and indirectly represented they are protected equally. It does to me appear absolutely puerile to introduce that argument as an objection to conferring the franchise upon the working classes. My belief, my conscientious belief is, that the introduction of a considerable repre sentation of the industry of this country into the House of Commons would have the effect of improving the char acter of that House, and not of deteriorating it—would add to the elements of safety and of intelligence, and not with draw r nything that would be considered a safeguard of our constitution. Mr R. KELL seconded the motion. Mr Alderman GoDWIN moved—"'That it is necessary Reformers throughout the country should co-operate with energy in order to induce the Government and Parliament to settle satisfactorily the Reform question. This meeting, therefore, rejoices in the establishment of the National Reform Union for that object, and promises to that organi sation its hearty support." Mr WHITEHEAD seconded and Mr A. ILLINGWORTH supported the motion, which, with the previous ones, was carried unanimously, A vote of thanks to the chairman concluded the pro.. ceedings, Demonstration of the Confederate Congress The Index publishes the following resolutions, which were introduced in the Confederate Congress on November 18, by Mr Henry, senator from Ten nessee : Resolved, by the Congress of the Confederate States of America :—That the people of the Confederate States are endowed by their Creator with the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ; that to secure these high rights governments were instituted among men, de riving their just powers from the consent of the governed, and, whenever any government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alier or abolish it, and to substitute a now government, laying its foundation on such principles and organising its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness ; that ou those principles, embodied in the Declaration of American Independence, the United Colo nies, in 177 G, d.ssolved the connection that bound them to the Government of Great Britain, and on them the Confederate States have severed the bonds of that poli tical union which connected them with the people and the Government of the United States of America, rather than submit to the repeated injuries inflicted upon them by that people, and to the usurpations of that Government, all of which had the direct object to deprive them of their rights, rob them of property secured to them by constitutional guarantees, and to establish an absolute tyranny over these States. Resolved—That the Confederate States appealed to arms in defence of these rights, and to establish these principles, only after they had in vain conjured the people and the Government of the United States, by all the ties of a com mon kindred, to discountenance and discontinue these in juries and usurpations, and after they had petitioned for redress in the most appropriate terms, and received in answer only a repetition of insults and injuries, which fore. shadowed usurpations still more dangerous to liberty. Resolved—That.after:nearly four years of cruel, desolat ing, and unnatural war, in which the people of the Con federate States have unquestionably established their capacity for self-government, and their ability to resist the attempts of the enemy to subjugate them, this Congress does not hesitate to aver its sincere desire fur peace, and to that end prwelaims to the world the readiness of the Go. verntnent of the Confederate States to open negotiations to establish a permanent and honourable peace between the Confederate States and the United States, upon the basis of the separate independence of the former. Resolved—That the time has come when the Confederate Congress, in the name of the people of the Confederate States, deem it proper again to proclaim to the world their unalterable detertuinat bin to be free, and that they do not abate one jot of their high resolve to dio freemen rather than live eaves ; and further, if the people of the United States, by re-elreting Abraham Lincoln, mean to tender to them four years more of war, or reunion with them on any terms, deeply depr:3ating the diro necessity want on l y thrust upon them, and relying upon the Justice of their cause end the gallantry of their soldias, they acceept the guago of battle and leave the result to the righteous arbi trament of Heaven. Itcsolved—That in view of the determination of the eneu►y to prosecute this horrid war still further, against which tho ewifi;Llerato States have at all times protested, and which the enemy had waged with extraordinary vigour, and — which has been marked by acts of extraordinary atrocity, in violation of the usages of civilised waddle, the Congress of the Confederate States will from this hour dedicate themselves anew to tho groat cause of sell. defence against the combined tyranny of the enemy. That it shall no longer be the momentary occupation of the Congress and the people of the Confederate States, but the business of their lives, to gather together the entire strength of the country in men and material of war, and put it forth as with the will of ono man, and with an unconquerable de termination to defend their altars and their firesides till the last votary of freedom falls around them. And yet—and this is above all what I desire to impress—a measure :hould it be forthcoming so moderate as to contain no such danger, and as to be proveably free from any such danger or source of alarm, will be worth your utmost sup port—for believe me no political proposition can be proved more true than this—l address myself to the working classes assembled here before me—that if you in the per sons of a portion of your class once gain a footing within the pale of the franchise, you become a part of the consti tutional bo ]y politic. Your political life may be said to have commenced, and the future will depend entirely on the use which you make of the vantage ground you have gained. (Applause.) And not only will such a measure be worth your support, it will, believe me, requi re th a t su pport if we your to overcome the disinclination of which I have spoken. In this respect your representatives are powerless. We who are on board the ship may discass the best course by which to steer—we may argue the safety of the port which we de sire to make—but it is from you, the outside public, that must come the breeze to fill our sails—and it is you only who can supply that necessary motive power, (Cheers.) Now) my resolution says " that the present state of Parlia mentary representation, excluding as it does a large ma y and unjust," any share in self.govern jmoernitte: i s o f m the ost u p n e s o a p t l i e s fa f e r t o o m r just." And in my opinion it is a condition of things which cannot be allowed to remain long, because it would be a discr e dit to statesman ship, as it would be a disgrace to public spirit, could it longer remain. Let me consider for one moment the ques tion of the present state of the representation, in that re • seed of it in which 1 confess that I have myself the most interest—l mean with reference to the ex t en t o f th e fran chise. The present franchise stops a l most exactly w h ere a class begins; whereas, its policy ought to be, ii not to ob literate, at least to tone down and to confine the already too s t rong ly-marked distinction of classes, it seems as if it was determined to stereotype influences in the const:tution of the coun try. The civilising social of late years have all tended towards making less distinct and less offensively marked these lines of demarcation between classes of society. But the franchise seems to step in and to say th e y shall con tines, as far as our political s ystem is con cerne d, as broadly marked as ever, and we w ill compel th e wor ki ng c l asses i n this country, with all their growing power and conscious ness of power, and with all th e i r increasing i n t e lligence, to think for themselves and t o act for themslves exclusively and narrowly, as a class apart, instead of thinking and of acting for themselves as a great fraction of a country and of a harmonising whole, (Cheers,) Previous speakers have re ferred to the manner in which the distress has been borne by the population of Lancashire, I am almost tired of hear ing the praises of the population of Lancashire from men who don't seem inclined to carry out those praises to their logical results, (Hear,) I was reading the other day a speech of Sir John Kay Shuttleworth at the anniversary meeting of the East Lancashire Union of Meehaniss' Insti tutes. It was a speech full of interest, of information, and of food for thought, It was a review of the progress of the working population of that large manufacturing district during the last fifty years, Now, I would defy any man to read that page of history, as I would call it, without feeling how immensely better is the present than was the past of that class, and without feeling how great is the future before them, Sir John Kay Shuttleworth showed to us the progress material, intellectual, moral, social, and I confess for one that I think any man reading that as a page of history might expect that the next should be the record of the willing admission of such men to take their share in the rights and duties of citizenship in the coun try which is common to us all. (Loud applause.) I have spoken of progress —of the immense progress of the working classes of this country, lam alive to that progress, and therefore it is not, so far as I am concerned, because of mis government that I would demand Reform. Ido not say that there is not always plenty for the Reformer to do—but that is not the, true, that is not the logical ground upon which to put your demand for Reform—because of that pro gress—because of that progress which has rendered it in evitable, and which proves it to be safe—and all the more safe and all the more likely to fructify to the advantage of the country, if it be willingly accorded. There are men in statesmanship who fear this progress —who call it demo cracy, and who would seek to stem its tide. But that de mocracy alone is dangerous which is a reaction against gross misgovernment, and which has its stormy birth in days of ignorance, of bigotry, and of oppressive rule. There is nothing of that which we should anticipate, but increased stability to the institutions of the country, and new power and added hietre to Our national life, elm o all and more titan ever before, a reuniting tcgot her of the bonds which bind class with class, till the lines of demarcation between them shall he lost in the harmony of the constitutional edi fice. (Cheers.) And when you ask for Reform, ask for it recognising all the merits and all the benefits of the pre sent and of the past, Ask for it as a right, for it is a right. But ask for it alto as a duty. (Hear.) Make your claim to the right of fulfillin g all the duties of citizenship in a great, free, and orderly community, and your claim will be heard, Fur the times are ripening for that event; its advent is accepted iu principl e by the intelliger:Ld c f the country, and it needs but one thing more to secure I t s mlisatioz, SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. TIMES.—The unhealthiness of London during the past year has scarcely attracted so much attention as • it deserves. Week after week and month after month the Bills of Mortality have been tar above the ave rage, and if the demand for a complete decennial epitome should be satisfied at the end of the current decade, the quota of 1861 will materially raise the mean result. If we take the last week only, we find that 1,624 deaths were registered, being in excess of the estimated number by 86, and still more in excess of the normal rate in mild winter weather. This return, however, unsatisfactory as it is, is an improvement on the return for the week before, and far more favourable than that for the week ending on November 19, when 1,742 deaths were registered. This unusual mortality, whatever be its general cause, appears to be distributed with tolerable uni formity among the various types of disease. Zymotic disorders are always rife at this time of year, and among those scarlatina and typhus maintain their bad pre-eminence ; but no particular epidemic of fever or smallpox is just now raging in the metro polis, and a decided increase of bronchitis among elderly and middle-aged persons is perhaps the only abnormal feature of the Registrar... General's Report. Such being the case, we naturally look to what may be called the permanent conditions of public health for the explanation of a phenomenon which does not seem to depend on any special visitation. The first thing that will occur to every one in connexion with the unhealthiness of the last 12 months is its extreme dryness. Such a drought as that of the season through which we have just passed is almost beyond the experience of any living person, and in many parts of the country the failure of the water supply has occasioned the greatest distress. It is true that the reservoirs of the metropolitan water companies held out beyond expectation, but a thundershower flushes the sewers more liberally than any company will ever be induced to do, and many sources of impurity are inaccessible to anything but rain. It is impossible not to suspect that deficient moisture has had some thing to do with the prevalence of disease, wipe• cially when we contrast the year 1864 with the year 1860. That summer was as wet as this has been dry, and it was the healthiest on record. The truth is, or appears to be, that our London atmosphere as well as our streets cannot be washed too thoroughly or constantly. There is little fear of damp, what with drainage below ground and combustion above, and no fog can resist the penetrating influence of a pouring day. It must also be remembered that a continued want of rain too often implies an undue proportion of east wind—a wind which poets may idealise as " the wind of God," but which suffering mankind, with one voice, refers to a totally diffe• rent quarter, and the action of which, in its rela tion to the earth's rotation, philosophers have aptly compared to that of stroking a cat's back the wrong way. It is difficult to say whether the properties of this veritable sirocco of London are more noxious in July or in November—when it scorches and closes the pores at the same time, or when it irri tates the bronchial tubes of the West -end with black and nauseous particles from the chimneys of White. chapel. Certain it is that few tempers are proof against the effects of this odious blast after it has swept the arid table-lands of Asia and Europe and absorbed the impurities of its own capital ; and that which damages the temper seldom improves th e we have ve r y lit t l e d ou b t i health. We are not in a position to prove it by me . teorological statistics, but that east wind has been n excess for a long time past, and has contributed materially to depress our vital powers. Still, there are many obvious para doxes in these fluctuations of health which have hitherto defied scientific research. What we know of the laws that govern the health of a large popu lation is as nothing compared with that we do not know: Not long ago the vitalising qualities of the atmosphere were supposed to depend a good deal on the presence of "ozone," and it was said to have been ascertained that on mountain heights and spots exposed to sea breezes, like the chain pier at Brighton, the quantity of this life-giving agent was very great If we mistake not, how ever, Mr. Glaisher foundin some of his balloon ascents that the ozone tests exhibited a diminu tion, instead of an increase, as ho rose above the vapours of the earth, and there is no telling that the new element " antozene" may not prove a for midable rival for popularity. Even generalisations of longer standing end higher authority have to be corrected, and sometimes almost reversed from time to time. Such is the comparison between the sani tary (fleets of town and country life. From the su perior longevity of those who live in country districts it has been inferred, much too hastily, that bad air, bad drainage, and bad water are the prime causes of premature death. There is, of course, much truth in this conclusion, partial as it is, but a minuter analysis of the fact discloses several errors. The drainage of large towns is, in general, far more per fect than that of country villages, and the stagna tion of putrefying matter is far commoner in the latter. This consideration, therefore, taken by itself, rather tells the wrong way, and it is more than doubtful whether the rural poor draw a more whole some liquid from ponds and so-called springs than is supplied to the town poor from public water works. The question of air remains, and here it must doubtless be admitted that cottages in the country ought to have an advantage over houses in the streets of a crowded city. They ought to have it, but do their inmates always avail themselves of it by opening their windows at proper times to admit the fresh air of heaven ; do they avoid overcrowding indoors, and wage war against domestic nuisances ? Everybody knows that they do not, and that the labourer who imbibes health unconsciously while he is working in the fields often does his best to tor feit it for himself and his family by tolerating a fetid atmosphere in his home. Air is, no doubt, an impor tant condition of health, but it is not enough that it should surronnd a domicile ; it must be breathed by those within it, and there is good reason to be lieve that sedentary pursuits in houses with closed doors and windows are nearly as prejudicial to vigor in the country as they are in towns. The sanitary differences, then, between London andWestmoreland or the Isle of Wight may be due to other circum stances than climate and density of population, and among these circumstances diet, clothing, and occu pation claim a prominent place. Happily. the two former, though neglected, are peculiarly within our own control, while the influence of unwholesome occupations may be counteracted to a great extent by the cultivation of wholesome habits. If all people knew how to manage themselves and their dependents as well as some do, the death rate would infallibly be lowered, and its variations in different years proportionately reduced. Scientific agricul ture, though it cannot command the resources of nature, keeps famine at bay, and simple precautions against contagion have greatly mitigated, if they cannot wholly repel, the ravages of pestilence. 18 it too much to expect that as the secrets of health —that is, of sustaining as well as restoring it—are further revealed, the whole tribe of fevers may yield to the same preventive means which have already banished the black-death, the sweating sickness, and the plague, and have brought the formidable small-pox of the last century into com parative subjection ? POST.—The density of the intellectual atmo sphere of Horsharn has just been pierced by a ray of light from Mr. Seymour Fitzgerald. Amid the mundane reveries of a cattle-show, Lord Derby's Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs has carried an audience of admiring listeners over the whole field of politics, with especial reference to the two great maxims of modern days—non-intervention and reform. It is hard to quarrel with Mr. Fitzgerald. We have all freely recognised his tact and his talents. Indeed, it was chiefly by his ability and address that the dignity of the English Foreign office was upheld during the late Administration. But really, allthough he takes care to tell us that the responsibilities of Opposition are as great as those of Ministerial life, we find a good deal of recklessness in many of his assertions, and a height of paradox to which official responsibility does not very often ascend. He does not attempt, indeed, the flights of Lord Stanley. It required a good deal of moral courage, and a good deal more of utilitarianism than Mr Seymour Fitzgerald pro fesses, to describe Rome 113 a quagmire of ruins. Mr Fitzgerald is not exactly the man who would dissuade the King of Italy from going to the Eter nal City, on the ground that the atmosphere was unhealthy, and the public buildings were out of repair, as Lord Stanley did the other day in his speech to the electors of King's Lynn. Indeed, he expressly told the good people of Horsham that he by no moans agreed with Lord Stanley's centralis mg and revolutionary proposal to divide the minor States of Germany between Austria and Prussia, and so to make two great military monarchies of the whole Confederation. Mr Fitzgerald, however, need hardly have taken the trouble to disown his support of an eccentric ietcrnatieual prograint»e which can merely have the Effect of incapacitating Lord Stanley from ever holding the office of Mini ster of Foreign Affairs. But the member for Here ham has his paradoxes filCO, though they are of a far late positive or practical kind. It is a little stir • •e. prising to hear the doctrine of non-intervention I!' foreign affairs set up as that of Lord Castlereag: and hi s . school. Mr Fitzgerald, indeed, is " t n fi d clear in . his argument as is usual with him ; 11- 11 there a little too much disposition to discover st all costs a point d'appui against the Administrati.o.; opßose ct ... l .. He tells . u . s in one place that he is quite the . principle of foreign intervention ; clple . he supposes the present Government .to have carried out in the recent instance of the Danish Willer He looks upon this as a violation of what he ct",'.: by an extraordinary mental distortion, Lord CaS t i o u r and this P riu ea r reagh's . principle of nondinterventio n--a° ".. winch is, perhaps, the happiest antithesis th at 149 Macaulay's delusion, that e verything good ceine from William of Orauge. 6 15 in our Fitzgerald, by the force of his position,ho inevitably . a party man ; but eve ourselves' Vi re, are . in no way tied to party obligations, s ere nee mind h i m that, if there were one pointed dutereje. more marked than another between Lord Cys t re . agh and the Liberals, it was that the latterlu the f ors ilt sia . ted that the incessant intervention of Ministers in the affairs of Europe should be broug ht to . a close; and it was really quite as much e n tl e l point as upon the question of Reform that the fin al triumph of the Liberal party was obtaine d :i e l or principle of non-intervention, whether licu l `", o o . otherwise, represents the growth of Liberal opin'-.0 Insomuch that those who would carry it out 0 (1 1 0 farthest extreme are the disciples of Mr. Cc b and Mr. Bright. Lord Pelmerston and Lord wee_ sell have endeavoured to preserve a mean betvihreur these . tw . o extremes of opinion ; and it seemSrltmr, surprising to be told that Lord Castlereagh anuo Cobden . are both on the same side" of the questieb; If it were otherwise we should wonder hei v e t t ha war of the French revolution and the Crusade s' ` e . Hundred days arose. But it is not very essY to s e where Mr. Fitzgerald's own juste m ll4° - 05 He says the debate on the Danish queetiong t he altered for the futur e . the foreign polic y (11 t e e; country ; and yet in the same breath be declal., the pol i o , of Mr. Cobden's views on of noneintervention. If the latter are full): ups e t we do not see how Mr. Fitzgerald and his 01 , ; ; N ; can be said to have changed our fore i g n for that is equivalent to saying that the doctrine ja non-intervention is repudiated, and yet that itna enforced. It is strange that a politician so just!,la acute i n practical life as Mr. Seymour Flizike";cli should . not perceive the false conclusions into he is led . by his partisan theories. Mr. Fitzr r ;i 4 . sees but little amendment in the constitutions l A t tie Lion, so to speak, of Europe, that is to sept a growth of liberal ideas and self-governm the observe that he adopts as a certain fact age restoration of the Holy Alliance of which we 5 , so evidence . early in the summer, and which 1/11- 10 0 much disputed at the time. No doubt that ', o a confederacy against the liberties of mankind' sod so lon as it lasts and the sphere of its authorip extends, it ie a ve - y powerful one. Fort however, there are already signs that whe n ', is been done . in the north and centre of Eu r T s lir provoking a liberal reaction elsewhere. ''„-oso at any rate has breathed the freer in ° to' quenco of it. The Convention of the 15th Sel ) , s es ber has been ono of its leading results. Nor "10 0 take a de spouding . view of the constitutional ifs of Austria, although the progress of the e lli a r e le , towards representative Government must be.j eo rf In pass i ng . to the question of our naval and 0 31 ';e0 establishments, Mr Fitzgerald endeavour`' w eed some success, to develop the true distinction to efficiency . and economy. He calla upon leas consider whether we could not do as much lc' 0 0 money. " Let us," he says, "by all means Oro! army of soldiers, but by no means an army of c l i A er not We are afraid the army of soldiers we ll '; tie!, prosper . . w ithout civilians to carry out the r- e 11 e1 13 7 of its daily wants; but if Mr. Fitzgerald ca out ho w lf b savings in this respect can mad e " - with be doing great service, He says, howeve r ' „ C 0 truth, that the department in which, "h -ild !east afford to wive our money is that of sh'P),llo ing, for we must always have the best ship s 1 0 ' that the resources of the country can produce' we deed, the peculiar burden of the expend it , ur f e have had for the last few years to encounten'sesi consisted . in the progress of artillery an d .„ - "h OC architecture, where no one has any certaic,y;eite the most approved ships of 1864 may not,`"Lostd out of d ate . in 1870. Mr. Fitzgerald then gia:" - eO O the subject of Parliamentary Reform, and P r e eje c l fesse . s t he . great di ffi culty of dealing wi t h the'l h ecr to li e . in the fact that no satisfactory , e r .e „;4ing, practicable, plan of representation for the "" 0 - es isli classes h as yet been hit upon. There is an ine r sLete disposition,. whenever the fabric cf the rePr e ,"ete tion . is next pulled about, to build up a rePr e % s if° tion for the working man on a comprehc-e on scale ; and while it would be impossible to dc . ) the basis of a numerical equality of votes w t l 3 oll classes at present holding the franchise, it 1 ° oa la to see a . hat kind of fractional representation!, de be received with satisfaction. We evillest' We f not altogether share Mr. " Fitzg erald's apPr elle :lM or "serious times" on the Continent a nd W e e ,. ° therefore, that we shall have the More les ser bestow on internal t Mire. COUNTRY MARKETS• of t"- LIVERPOOL—FRIDAY. raP tif e ° We have had but a erate our corn exchango this mod morning, a with ttendance a slow eonst i P ejo demand for wheat, and no alteration in prices. t 0 there was a firm trade, but at no advance on I'4 Oats and oatmeal dull. Barley and peas were jai:l;4i cheaper. Beans steady. Indian corn rather nor for, at fully last Friday's prices. Market close s inactive. WAKEFIELD—FRIDAY. A OP The wheat trade is still slow, and there ie 11- ,, c „ ii rief i l i a previous values. Millers buy aringly. Fine " -- " re re" steady ; other sorts difficult to sell. BOW! vie-- cheaper. Wheat Averages for the week : pa Oats 3041 qrs., at ........ 400 n o 18 025 ' Barley.... 1"n ........ . /l a " 4 ........ 29° 36S 0a .Peas .... 5 . .. Beans ..... ................ 370 3 --- 0' STAMFORD—FRIDAY. 36 004 r. White wheat, :40s:to 425; red, 35s to 38s Pa 0 0 . i . et Barley, malting, 31s to Ms ; grinding, 27a to lye Oats, 18s to 24stper 24 stone. Beans, old , 3811- qr. ; new, 36s to 3tis. .A. E ' LINCOLN.—FRIDAY. 111 1 / 4e O f There was a pretty fair show of wheat at 00, 0 fOr day, with a dull inquiry, and a shade lower than 09 0 quotations. .0i t ° '4 O White wheat new, 40s to 44s Barley, grilla iligi Pt t o ° t: Red do, 36s to 38s OatB ^old .. """" 0$ -4 , Old white/. 7 ~ , 0 tO 0 42s to 47s New do ........ 43 " to d Red do. 30s to 438 i Beans..... .360 Barley, walting 338 to 318 1 Beans, new .•''' BURTON. ON-TRENT-I'lO l lOA doI °fl if A seasonable supply of wheat, and sales We re IDs to 43° 1 0 at rather lower rates than this day week. Old white wheat ..43s to 47s I Old red wheat, .•. .40, o 3 6$ t o 0 New do. ...Ns to 46s N e w do. ' so 4 46 Malting barley ....32s to 34s I Oats. ........... .31 0 Grinding d0.....26s to 29s I Beans ........ .& BRISTOL SUGAR—FRIDA-V. A p ries The market continues in a depressed state, 9 0 " 096 4 guile nominal fur all descriptions of raw suetrid sugar is difieult to sell at 6(1 (lodine, and doing, Rum in good demand at full prices. CL MARKET. ' races of Coal peton at the close Ottuee bpd o B ' C \L‘vv o aye m y tt b i t e me n r tHartl e y Hartley . .. a. d. W a lla • ° 3 ° 18 8 66 Hatton . . •_. •'' ...: . ' :'''''' l 30 s West Hart lBl 6 K lie e u ll g oe h , H . 31 2. ** ................. ley 18 3 South lalloo. •• • •.• 1 6 ttoa" 2 0 l3yass's Bebside West Braddyll's Lie .• '0 a r. # Hartley ... 18 6 Framwellga t° '. • 0 r Davison's West Hart- Pensher Fri03r090'....i ? ley lB 6 Russel's nottoll" ',..:13 6 Cassop ........ ••'....., 0 Caradoe ...... ' ' ..• Hartlepool .. .... ..! Walls End. South Holton 23 0 Byron 21 61 Ships at market, 60 ; sold, 5 5, ___.......- - - )00 London: PrlnZed and E'vNishe,O $ by IN;„ 0; 01 No. 112, Stra nd, Printer, at l'ffß 01 1.1) Strauq, the Preci n ct of the tvoy, •o.° 1.11,101,45fA., S a turday, Deuetutn r 10, lE64' Xe n , Rale P, 0: (I , y. IT , p (4 : CaPt. Th e A Make egoi 038. Crosb ?'••••—___ 971 ... Th e re 11,pr N' a ulqn( t he Itb d B Pyi ,I)1 411 ( he (44 he Gal' q , „.Tlt-1 Ali ma tO k Lt ..e 1) lit ti otned tie 1411,1 11113 t - r . O /34edana The Fit 4t o itF 111 '0Za T he u; ,IV - °OlO e titnie A o 04 4 N Ad Z. wef ch tatotrl'ea, Births. 011 1 ‘ 01ell' Fox.—On the Bth inst., at Haddon Holl ee ' Alte r ' of Derbyshire, Mrs. Edward Ward Fox, of a cliat 4100' e ' r o HicRIPING.—On the Bth inst Mrs Sidney 14 ' 0 0" St. Alban's, of a son. 9 * 6 01' TREFuSIS.—On the Bth inst., at 8, Park' of of p _square, the Hon. Mrs. Trefusis, of a son. _„ wife ULLETT —On the Bth inst., at Blythe House, OP B. - Ullett, Esq., of a daughter. od t Marriages. 0 L ot t f"'o BARTLETT ..-HOARE.—On the Bth inst., 0,. pot° ter Sussex, the Rev. Thomas Bartlett, rector 0 015 13 timer, Northamptonshire, to Lucinda Grace , , jot the Rev. Henry Hoare, vicar of Frarafield• of '' '‘ C ., t , 0... BITTERSEY—MIDDLETON —On the Btli je39,1,,,i r' Stephen's Church, Geo g Battersby Eerie - 0) Tuto ti/ of Loughbawn, co. Wresetureath, to Goorgli,ficl°- youngest daughter of the late Lieut.-COlone 42d Royal Highlanders. elr i Deaths. to _, plor 3 ARCRBOULD.—On the 7th inst., at ThropstoP or tonshire, John Archbould, Esq., aged ..64.r Ir. 0 BARROW.—On the Bth inst. Janet, wit ° °^ D' s i ert Barrow,of the Morning Herald, aged 67. • 13fr LUARD, —On the 9th inst., at the residone? of A b e l : Ge°4 3, Gloucester - gardens, ifyde-park, Lap sels Luard, of the Royal Artillery. f gorriaert MARRINER.—On the 7th inst., John Ga -er 1 iN r. of Surbiton-hill-Park, Surrey, aged 81. . r cieoo ll NEPEAN.—On the Bth inst., at Dover, Maio - -- 1, Nepean, aged 69. ------- 1 1 ; _-- ---- 1; ANV I L IPI; tot. It I , k soia ..qe It 8, abSei N 4l how; 14 htqcl g en re, liecj itch